Dismissing Sara Duterte’s impeachment thru Senate reso illegal 鈥� solons
Senate President Francis Escudero (L) and Vice President Sara Duterte (R). | PHOTOS: Senate PRIB and official Facebook page of Inday Sara Duterte
MANILA, Philippines — Several members of the House of Representatives believe that dismissing the impeachment complaint against Vice President Sara Duterte through a Senate resolution will be “unconstitutional,” arguing that a trial should be conducted first before judgment is made.
House prosecution member and Manila 3rd District Rep. Joel Chua said Wednesday that dismissing the impeachment case without a trial would violate the 1987 Constitution, which mandates the Senate to hear arguments from both sides.
Earlier, sources revealed to 好色先生TV a draft Senate resolution seeking to dismiss the impeachment raps against Duterte due to insufficient time to discuss the matter.
“Well, what I know about that is that under the Constitution, the job of the Senate is to hear the cases, right? And for us, our job is to prosecute, so I don’t know how they will be able to dismiss that without first conducting the trial. And that is their constitutional mandate,” said Chua, a lawyer by profession.
“For me, that is unconstitutional. They are violating their constitutional mandate,” he added.
Prosecution member and Batangas 2nd District Rep. Gerville Luistro also pointed out that the Constitution requires a trial before judgment can be rendered.
“The Constitution is clear. [Under] Art. XI Sec. 3 par. 6, the Senate has the sole power to try and decide all impeachment cases. There is no mention at all of dismissal, which means it is mandatory that they conduct a trial and thereafter decide, whether for acquittal or for conviction,” she said in a message to reporters.
Former Bayan Muna lawmaker and lawyer Neri Colmenares aired the same concern, saying:
“Is that true? If true, as I mentioned yesterday, only the impeachment court can dismiss an impeachment complaint after trial. They have to convene the court first.”
Under Article XI, Section 3 of the 1987 Constitution, the House has the power to initiate all impeachment complaints against the president, vice president, members of the Supreme Court and the constitutional commissions, and the Ombudsman.
The same section states that a Senate trial “shall forthwith proceed” if the verified impeachment complaint, contained in a resolution, is filed and signed by one-third of all House members.
The impeachment resolution against Duterte met the threshold of 102 signatures, with 215 lawmakers endorsing it on February 5.
Concerns over the delays started as early as last week when Senate President Francis Escudero rescheduled the presentation of the articles of impeachment.
Originally, Escudero sent a letter to House Speaker Ferdinand Martin Romualdez inviting the House prosecution panel to present the articles before the Senate plenary on June 2, with impeachment proceedings expected to begin the following day.
However, last Thursday, Escudero sent another letter to Romualdez informing him that the reading of the articles of impeachment would be rescheduled to June 11. This will be the Senate’s last session day before the 19th Congress adjourns.
READ: Presentation of impeachment articles vs Sara Duterte moved to June 11
Since then, Escudero has faced criticism from various sectors, including House members, who believe the rescheduling of the presentation of the articles of impeachment effectively delays the process.
On Monday, former senator and incoming Mamamayang Liberal party-list lawmaker Leila de Lima said that Escudero is effectively violating the Constitution, as the delays contravene the “forthwith” provision under Article XI.
READ: De Lima: Escudero violating Constitution with impeachment trial delay
On Tuesday, Akbayan party-list Rep. Percival Cendaña asked if Escudero is afraid of Duterte, as they believe the Senate is just delaying the impeachment trial.
Cendaña reminded the Senate that surveys show the public wants to see the impeachment trial and noted that Duterte herself views the proceedings as an opportunity to defend herself.
READ: House member asks Escudero: Are you afraid of Sara Duterte?
Duterte’s impeachment centers on alleged misuse of confidential funds (CF) and threats to top officials, including President Ferdinand Marcos Jr, First Lady Liza Araneta Marcos, and Romualdez.
The fourth complaint merges earlier complaints, citing House committee findings on CF spending.
During the hearings, lawmakers discovered unusual names signing acknowledgement receipts (ARs) for confidential expenses made by Duterte’s offices. ARs are submitted to the Commission on Audit to prove that funding for projects reached its intended beneficiaries, which in this case, are confidential informants.
Antipolo City 2nd District Rep. Romeo Acop noticed that one of the individuals who signed the ARs was named Mary Grace Piattos, a name similar to a restaurant and a potato chip brand.
Later, Lanao del Sur 1st District Rep. Zia Alonto Adiong presented two ARs—one from the Office of the Vice President and another from the Department of Education—both signed by a certain Kokoy Villamin. However, the signatures and handwriting on the two documents differed.
Additionally, neither name was found in the Philippine Statistics Authority database./mcm/abc
